Wednesday, January 16, 2013

White House Redefines Diversity And Tolerance

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
Initially, the White House had invited Pastor Louie Giglio, an evangelical pastor, well known for his extensive ministry in combating human trafficking around the world and leader of the Passion City Church in Roswell, GA., to give the benediction at the Inauguration of President Obama this month.

Now, the White House and other homosexual activists, including those at the Washington Post, have bullied him to withdraw from giving the high profile prayer.

He has graciously done so.

Why did the White House suddenly eliminate him from their program?

They said they wanted someone whose beliefs "reflect this administration's vision of inclusion and acceptance."

The White House action reflects anything but inclusion and acceptance.

Here's why they eliminated the pastor from the program.

The inaugural committee said, "We were not aware of Pastor Giglio's comments at the time of his selection and they don't reflect our desire to celebrate the strength and diversity of our country at this Inaugural."

And what are "the comments?"

Here's what the President will not tolerate. The comments were delivered in a sermon by Pastor Giglio:

"If you want to hear God's voice, that is his voice to this issue of homosexuality. It is not ambiguous and unclear. It is very clear. If you look at the counsel of the word of God, Old Testament, New Testament, you come quickly to the conclusion that homosexuality is not an alternate lifestyle. . . . is not just a sexual preference, homosexuality is not gay, but homosexuality is sin. It is sin in the eyes of God, and it is sin according to the word of God."

The Christian Post has published an article asking, "New Era of Religious Intolerance In America?"

Anyone holding biblical beliefs regarding homosexuality are not tolerated and are being pushed out of the public square, ironically under the guise of "tolerance" and "inclusion."

Albert Moher, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary said, "If you are a Christian, get ready for the question you will undoubtedly face: 'Do you now, or have you ever believed that homosexuality is a sin?'" He says there is "nowhere to hide."

John Piper, a nationally known pastor and bestselling author said, "When Louie Giglio is called an 'unrepentant bigot' the word morphs from truth into a tantrum."

Piper was referring to this article in the Washington Post.

Please take a moment and read it. It is a catechism on Obama's new era of intolerance toward biblical Christianity.

Russell Moore, a Southern Baptist theologian, put it this way, "When it is now impossible for one who holds to the catholic [universal church] Christian view of marriage and the gospel to pray at a public event, we now have a de facto established state church.

"Just as the pre-constitutional Anglican and congregational churches required a license to preach in order to exclude Baptists, the new state church requires a 'license' of embracing sexual liberation in all its forms."

The Obama Inauguration is indeed an inauguration of a new era of intolerance and exclusion of those who practice biblical Christianity.

God help us.


  1. You are not a gay and muslim loving anti american, you are not welcome at the White House.

  2. "They'll" just never understand the difference between hating the sin and loving the person. If "they" were so "inclusive and accepting" None of what the Pastor preached in the past should matter!

    That's the problem with our government and all these minority groups. There are far too many differences in this world to make them all equal, which is why the ORIGINAL definition and tolerance meant something over the past 200 years!

    The White House and homosexual factions need to 'get over it'.

    "Wake Up America"

  3. Leave the man alone. If he didn't want to be the center of this particular controversy that is his decision to make. Doing the presidential invocation is stepping into the limelight and its a voluntary one.

    The minister was invited and the invitation was not withdrawn even though he doesn't agree with the White House on all issues. That is the very definition of 'tolerance' and his invitation was 'diversity'.

    "Why did the White House suddenly eliminate him from their program?"

    Because he withdrew of his own choice and volition.

    ""When it is now impossible for"

    And when it is that will be an issue. As it stands the last two inaugural invocations could have been from ministers who had very similar views on this subject. Both were complained about, the difference is one stayed and gave it, the other withdrew. There was no 'impossible' here, it was a free will choice by the minister.

    But then Christianists have embraced the faux victim mindset with a vengeance. Why would anyone fall for this kind of demagoguery? There are different opinions on this issue - and one only has to look at R74 to realize that both sides have ways they express their opinions on it. Everyone has a right to an opinion, everyone else has a right to their opinion on that opinion, and on it goes.

    The minister said he withdrew because he didn't want the controversy to distract from his current mission focus which is completely reasonable and likely. And one only has to look at how the Christianists jumped on the Reverend Wright to realize that all this shows is the hypocrisy that corrupts their movement.

  4. He withdrew because of intense pressure from the White House and the press. Read the Washington article. He was bullied. He is a class guy so he stepped aside.

    1. The Washington Post article? There is no indication of 'intense pressure' at all in it, he in fact said nice things about the President and stated he was stepping down completely voluntarily for simply stated reasons.

      Again, that is his choice, the invitation was not withdrawn by the White House, he could be speaking if he chose to, he just simply chose not to - you can't call him a class guy in one breath and say he is being disingenuous in his reasons why in the next.

      He has a right to his opinions, everyone has a right to disagree with them, and he still could have participated even then - that is the very definition of tolerance. Learn from it.

  5. First the muslim kicks God out out ourlives and now he's taking our guns away he needs to be impeached.

    1. Good grief man , the president has a right to make sure the person who swears him in reflects his politics. According to him his beliefs support gay marriage or at least it reflects his politics . You think this is a Christian nation ? Look at the divorce rate , out of wedlock rate is 40 percent , and this includes those of us who are Christians .

      I don't like the way our culture reflecs supporting moms and dads as biased or hateful , but your rhetoric here surely gives them ammo .


  6. @9:19 AM

    I read the linked WaPo article. There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in that article that supports your claim that Giglio was pressured by the White House at all! Let alone, "intense pressure", much less your false claim of bullying.

    In fact, there was no request from the White House or the Inaugural Committee that he withdraw, he did that on his own initiative.

    Further, if you and Gary are going to accuse LGBT groups of "bullying" for objecting to him speaking, does that label not also apply in equal measure to right-wing Christianist groups like the AFA, who objected to Giglio lending support to the inclusive, pro-gay Obama?

  7. Giglio is a classey person. Here's what he said-"Giglio released a statement Thursday saying that he believed the prayer he wished to give "will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration."
    Anyone who can't see the pressure in the Washington Post article for Giglio to go away is blinded by their own prejudice.

    1. Anyone who presents people expressing their opinion about him as 'intense pressure' doesn't understand how American freedoms work.

    2. Anyone, who sees pressure from the White House, which was your original assertion, is blinded by prejudice.

      Anyone, who snivels about the "bullying" from the LGBT community, while ignoring the exact same "bullying" from the right wing Christianist community, is also blinded by prejuduce!

  8. Gary, thanks for making the point that as long as someone's viewpoint agrees with the secular/humanist viewpoint, they are acceptable at the White House, like the current pastor they picked. Giglio was right 15 years ago and he's still right, an honorable man. God's Word doesn't change, it's the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.

    Craig in Lacey

    1. Right on Craig and well said.

    2. Is very alarming how quickly this culture has changed . Public education and the media promotes a new normal . I use to call it revisionist history , but reflecting the culture I remember and see as positive is considered revisionist now I guess. I really do not see how so many kids being brought up in a world with their natural mom and dad can be seen as healthy or just another choice . Or how that even turned into a conversation about being anti gay . But the left ulled it off . I just do not not understand anyone over 50 can say its a good thing . But many do .


  9. Yes, homosexuality is sin. God hates it and so should we. God hates all sin and we should also.

    What kind of people is it that should embrace sin? None that God created.


Faith and Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.